Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Civil Liberties

votesparks

(1,288 posts) Tue Aug 25, 2015, 09:12 PM Aug 2015

VIDEO: Black Man Pulled Over by White Cop for 'Making Direct Eye Contact'

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

VIDEO: Black Man Pulled Over by White Cop for 'Making Direct Eye Contact' (Original Post) votesparks Aug 2015 OP

David Pakman and his partner are good and I watch his videos whenever I come across them but . . . brush Aug 2015 #1

wtf! Direct eye contact! k and r. bbgrunt Aug 2015 #2

I wonder if he also would've been pulled over for avoiding making direct eye contact. BarstowCowboy Aug 2015 #3

brush

(57,517 posts)

1. David Pakman and his partner are good and I watch his videos whenever I come across them but . . .

Reply to votesparks (Original post)

Tue Aug 25, 2015, 09:32 PM

Aug 2015

they missed the huge elephant in the room somehow.

They weren't trailed for "making eye contact" with the cop.

That is cop bullshit because the cop couldn't come up with a reason other than the real reason — just like the "not signaling one hundred feet before the turn" crappola.

They were pulled over for driving while black.

It's that simple.

We should all know this by now.

bbgrunt

(5,281 posts)

2. wtf! Direct eye contact! k and r.

Reply to votesparks (Original post)

Tue Aug 25, 2015, 11:20 PM

Aug 2015

BarstowCowboy

(171 posts)

3. I wonder if he also would've been pulled over for avoiding making direct eye contact.

Reply to votesparks (Original post)

Mon Aug 31, 2015, 10:25 PM

Aug 2015

I wonder if he would've been pulled over for avoiding making direct eye contact too.

Reply to this discussion